.bk J02
.fl P821mH.j
.fd comments on elevations of features f143, f149, f150
.rd P821
.ri mH
.ed P821
.ei mH

f 135
nv The top elevation of this feature was 89.46 m. Last season (MZ17-O) the bottom of the last feature (f105) in k4 was 90.30 m, which leaves 84 cm to be accounted for. The bottom elevation of the last feature excavated last year (f112) in k3 and recorded in last year's feature log is 89.73, which is closer to the top elevation of f135. Last year we left the southern part of k4 higher than the northern part and it is possible that the bottom elevation given for f105 refers only to this higher part of k4. aP's notes for feature f105 suggest that this is the right interpretaion, although the meaning of her note is not altoghether clear.

f 143
pb Top and bottom elevations recorded in the feature log are inaccurate (The feature log gives 89.73 m as the top elevation m3956 + 84 - 114 and 89.54 m as the bottom elevation m3957 +92 - 124). f143 abuts f141 and thus it should start approximately at the same elevation as f141 (89.35 m). Indeed, the only qlot q385 excavated in this feature gives 89.32 m (m3956 +50 -121) as the top elevation of the feature. The correct bottom elevation remains unknown, but since f145 goes under f143, the bottom elevation of f143 should be higher than the bottom elevation of f145, which is 89.06 m.

f 149
pb There is a mistake in the bottom elevation of this feature and by extention also in the starting elevation of f150. One possible explanation is that the elevation of the measuring rod was recorded inaccurately while writing down these elevations. With the recording m3955 +52 - 124 the bottom elevation of f149 and the starting elevation of f150 is 89.18, which is 12 higher than the starting elevation of f149 and thus cannot be correct. If, however, the instrument hight was 141 cm (as suggested by f150 q395) instead of 124 cm as recorded, the bottom elevation of f149 and the starting elevation of f150 would turn out to be 89.01 m, which seems more accurate. With this solution one problem still remains: with the instrument heigh of 141 cm q395 (f150) was then 33 cm thick, which seems too much, but could perhaps we be accurate.

f 150
pb There is a mistake in the top elevation of this feature and by extention also in the bottom elevation of f149. One possible explanation is that the elevation of the measuring rod was recorded inaccurately while writing down these elevations. With the recording m3955 +52 - 124 the bottom elevation of f149 and the starting elevation of f150 is 89.18, which is 12 higher than the starting elevation of f149 and thus cannot be correct. If, however, the instrument hight was 141 cm (as suggested by f150 q395) instead of 124 cm as recorded, the bottom elevation of f149 and the starting elevation of f150 would turn out to be 89.01 m, which seems more accurate. With this solution one problem still remains: with instrument of 141 q395 (f150) was then 33 cm thick, which seems too much, but could perhaps we be accurate.

f 156
pb Our top elevation for this feature in this season (90.32 m) is higher than the bottom elevation of f111 (89.73), last feature excavated in k14 last season. This is because the northern baulk of k14 and an area 1 m south of it were brought down lower than last season the rest of the locus to the south. The bottom elevation of f111 refers to this lower area whereas our f156 is located in the higher area. Until the baulks were re-established this season the baulk of k14 and the 1 m wide stretch to the south of it were included within k13 in our note-taking. This lower area should start at the same elevation as the k13 to the north. The bottom elevation noted in feature log for f125, which was the last feature excavated in k13 last season, however, contradicts this. According to the feature log the bottom elevation of f125 was 90.78 m. This, however, cannot be correct since the top elevation of q354, the second to last qlot in k13 (the last q-lot q361 contains pottery excavated within q354 and did not involve further excavation), is 89.66 m. This elevation is 7 cm higher than our starting elevation with f136, the first feature in k13 (including k14 baulk and the 1 m wide area to its south) this year. Therefore the bottom elevation for f125 noted in the feature log must be incorrect. The correct one should be around 89.59 m, the starting elevation of f136 in k13.

f 125
pb According to the feature log, the bottom elevation of f125 was 90.78 m. This, however, cannot be correct since the top elevation of q354, the second to last qlot in k13 (the last q-lot q361 contains pottery excavated within q354 and did not involve further excavation), is 89.66 m. This elevation is 7 cm higher than our starting elevation with f136, the first feature in k13 (including k14 baulk and the 1 m wide area to its south) this year. Therefore the bottom elevation for f125 noted in the feature log must be incorrect. The correct one should be around 89.59 m, the starting elevation of f136 in k13.